United States v. Felix Garcia-Godoy

468 F. App'x 680
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 9, 2012·No. 11-50204·Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Felix Garcia-Godoy appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence found during an inventory search of his vehicle.

Contrary to Garcia-Godoy’s assertion, the inventory search in this case was not “for the sole purpose of investigation.” Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 372, 107 S.Ct. 738, 93 L.Ed.2d 739 (1987); United States v. Bowhay, 992 F.2d 229, 231 (9th Cir.1993).

Nor was the district court’s finding that the searching officers followed “standardized procedures” clearly erroneous. See United States v. Ruckes, 586 F.3d 713, 716 (9th Cir.2009); see also United States v. Mancera-Londono, 912 F.2d 373, 375 (9th Cir.1990). It is of no moment that the search was never completed. United States v. Scott, 665 F.2d 874, 876 (9th Cir.1981).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Felix Garcia-Godoy, 468 F. App'x 680 (9th Cir. 2012).

468 F. App'x 680 (United States v. Felix Garcia-Godoy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Colorado v. Bertine
479 U.S. 367 (Supreme Court, 1987)
United States v. James Carl Scott
665 F.2d 874 (Ninth Circuit, 1981)
United States v. Paul Robert Bowhay
992 F.2d 229 (Ninth Circuit, 1993)
United States v. Ruckes
586 F.3d 713 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)